Theresa May: UK must leave European single market • Hacker News Board

Re: Theresa May: UK must leave European single market

#271

Post by thenomad » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 4:04 PM UTC

dazc wrote: post #119

thenomad wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't agree more, and I wonder why you're being downvoted so hard. Particularly given that 52% of the voters voted for Leave, not for a hard Brexit. Those are two very different propositions and a significant chunk of the 52% didn't want a hard Brexit.

How did you arrive at this conclusion other than pure conjecture? The in-out vote was a binary choice, as I remember?

There were polls before and after the event on exactly this question, as well as considerable discussion of the Leave options from Leave campaigners and the press.

So I conclude what I originally said from those data points.

Re: Theresa May: UK must leave European single market

#272

Post by raesene6 » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 4:05 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #268

raesene6 wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me ask you a question, do you honestly believe that control of immigration wasn't a key reason that people voted for the leave campaign?

I believe that it was a key factor for many voters, as, for many of those same voters, was the belief that it could be done while retaining the benefits of the common market.

quite possibly, but of course that is, and always has been an impossiblity (the EU were never going to budge on what is a fundamental freedom)

Re: Theresa May: UK must leave European single market

#273

Post by raesene6 » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 4:18 PM UTC

Chestofdraw wrote: post #264

raesene6 wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me ask you a question. Do you honestly believe that a big part (if not the key part) of the leave campaign (pick any one you like) wasn't about immigration and border control?

I'll tell you what, we can talk about the efficacy of the various leave campaigns when the NHS gets its 350 million a day and we have 'Sovereignty'.

I note that I'm afraid you didn't even attempt to answer my extremely straightforward question.

See I'm not a brexiter/leaver/whatever (Personally I think it's a terrible idea), but it's blindingly obvious to me that a lot of leave voters (maybe even the vast majority) thought the main issue was immigration and that Mrs May had a choice either exit the single market, or basically ignore the result of the referendum, she chose the former and not the latter.

Re: Theresa May: UK must leave European single market

#274

Post by alphonsegaston » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 4:20 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #54

It'll be interesting to see how the UK handles this. I suspect they will fail, but they should be applauded for trying. A single market is not an unmitigated good. The single market that exists within the U.S. is the major reason why federalism has failed. When governments can't exercise control over commerce with external entities, it becomes impossible to really chart a destiny distinct from the larger union. Massa…

The US single market and stronger federal controls are the only reason that states have ANY form of sovereignty. The United States was originally established as a confederacy with weak federal powers, more similar to the political arrangements of the EU than what we have today. The result was an unmitigated economic and foreign relations disaster, such that we risked imploding and being taken over again by the British. We only achieved stability and continued sovereignty by establishing a greater degree of federal authority over the union. What we today have as our Constitution is a direct response to the failed model of a union of autonomous states. And even this has had to be renegotiated in the direction of increased federal power in order to protect and expand democratic rights (ending slavery and it's political legacy).

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Articles_of_Confe...

Re: Theresa May: UK must leave European single market

#275

Post by rusk » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 4:25 PM UTC

raesene6 wrote: post #270

rusk wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have voted in a great many referendums here in Ireland. They typically arise when a constitutional amendment is required, and the language in them is pretty clear and unequivocal. You are presented with the actual literal constitutional changes and whether they are acceptable or not. Usually (but far less so than I would like) there is a public debate about the pros and cons of the proposed changes. The discussion…

oh no I'm not suggesting that people knew what they were getting into in full, but then given that this is entirely unchartered territory I don't see how that could have worked really. This has never been done before and therefore no-one knows what it means. Both sides of the campaign, in my view, heavily had the Fear Uncertainty and Doubt angles playing, but then that's no different to most/all UK elections (just lo…

It's completely my fault, using the terms incorrectly, but you've misunderstood my point. Thus neatly illustrating how slippery language can be.

From a legal and constitutional standpoint your current government is indeed "elected" (as is the present "minority government" here in Ireland). However I would posit that from a moral standpoint there should be another election.

The public mandate imparted by Brexit is murky at best and necessitates a return to the polls. The most obvious means to that is a general election.

I think taking the campaign rhetoric as some kind of instruction is undemocratic in the extreme. Also taking opinion polls is obviously flawed. They are instructive but if you're taking them into account, how can you ignore more recent polls that show a gradual drift towards "Remain"?

I suppose you "could" have a second referendum where the specific terms of "Leave" were specified ... but I can't see that going down too well as a suggestion.

Re: Theresa May: UK must leave European single market

#276

Post by gonvaled » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 4:36 PM UTC

youngtaff wrote: post #251

sangnoir wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Personally, I am not a huge fan of these currency, trading or political blocs. The EU seems to be pretty effective at preventing wars within Europe. That's a good enough pro to cancel out all the other cons on my list. But hey, it's been three generations since our last big war, we are probably overdue on a reminder of why fully-industrialized total war is not such a great idea.

Are you sure about that? Have we had no wars in Europe since WW2 because of the EU, or because the generations before us were sick of war? Also the EU didn't stop a war in the Balkans…

The Balkans were not in the EU. The EU gives economic incentives to its members not to go to war. It does not magically prevent wars all around the world.

Re: Theresa May: UK must leave European single market

#277

Post by raesene6 » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 4:38 PM UTC

rusk wrote: post #275

raesene6 wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

oh no I'm not suggesting that people knew what they were getting into in full, but then given that this is entirely unchartered territory I don't see how that could have worked really. This has never been done before and therefore no-one knows what it means. Both sides of the campaign, in my view, heavily had the Fear Uncertainty and Doubt angles playing, but then that's no different to most/all UK elections (just lo…

It's completely my fault, using the terms incorrectly, but you've misunderstood my point. Thus neatly illustrating how slippery language can be. From a legal and constitutional standpoint your current government is indeed "elected" (as is the present "minority government" here in Ireland). However I would posit that from a moral standpoint there should be another election. The public mandate imparted by Brexit is mur…

Ah well any discussion of morals and politics (as practiced in most countries) is unlikely to go well ;o)

The problem I see with reverting to a general election is that unless all parties campaign purely on an exact list of what they will and won't do with regards to the EU, the mandate provided would be no clearer than the one derived from the referendum.

A general election would mess the EU issue in with things like labour's infighting and legacy issues with the lib dems (a lot of their traditional vote don't seem to trust them after their deal with the previous tory government)

The reality is that a general election campaign would involve more campaign rhetoric and politicians would be just as tied as they usually are to keeping promises after the fact (i.e. not at all)

For me, whilst the precision of what was being voted for is unclear, the idea that a result after a win for the leave campaign wouldn't involve some kind of change to immigration policy is just unbelievable and because of the binary nature of the decision, todays outcome was inevitable.

Re: Theresa May: UK must leave European single market

#278

Post by alphonsegaston » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 4:40 PM UTC

detritus wrote: post #269

alphonsegaston wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In threads about the EU/Brexit, I've seen repeated arguments about how the EU can't function like the United States because of how much more unified Americans are now and historically. It all quite laughably ignores how all of our stability has only come from increased federal authority whenever we've had similar crises. I guess Europeans are as ignorant of American history as we are of their's.

Not really — that's the exact crux of the argument for many British and Germans, etc: "Is the EU a full federal project, with all of the responsibilities and expectations that encompasses?". In both countries and the likes of Greece, the answer has been a resounding "NO!" which leads to the inevitable and existing impasse the continent currently faces. America is politically able to let, for example, Detroit, die a l…

The US was not a fully federal project at its outset either, and has had to repeatedly renegotiate the terms of its union towards increased federal authority in order to avoid collapse and takeover by outside powers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Articles_of_Confe...

States, despite all this fanciful nostalgia, do not exist in a vacuum and their continued sovereignty today is dependent on belonging to a larger unions. It's the only way to protect themselves from the imperialism of powerful federal unions like the US, Russia, and China. If any European state thinks that it can exist independently of a federal (or worse) arrangement, it has misunderstood 20th century history.

And I would also argue the election of Trump demonstrates that you actually can't allow Detroit and similar regions to wither without significant political repercussions. The Democrats tried that and it cost them the election.

Re: Theresa May: UK must leave European single market

#279

Post by abandonliberty » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 4:41 PM UTC

raverbashing wrote: post #76

akjainaj wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is funny because if the EU is to survive, immigration controls will have to be put in place. Many countries are already demanding to control their borders. So when that happens, the UK will feel stupid for leaving, I suppose. They could've just waited.

"control the borders!!!11" are one of the catch-phrases that make absolutely no sense for people with only a modest understanding of how it actually works But I'm sure to some Brexiters brown people at the streets is the fault of the EU somehow

>brown people at the streets

You mean those of Indian descent that have been there 5 generations?

Re: Theresa May: UK must leave European single market

#280

Post by kuschku » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 4:45 PM UTC

virmundi wrote: post #199

kuschku wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Europe is not a single market at all. Oh, it’s already a lot better than it was before. But you are right, a fuckton of work is required to make it even slightly competitive with the US, China, or India. But we should work towards that – and not split it up even further.

Isn't one of the issues with the EU government that it's recalcitrant to reform? Brussels feels like they have a cozy little cocoon. Any attempts to make them work for the people in a meaningful way get rebuffed.

Oh, the EU parliament works all the time for the people

The problem is that all national governments have to approve each EU directive before it becomes law in the EU council. The national governments then usually, due to lobby pressure, add loopholes to net neutrality, reduce consumer protections, or demand TTIP.

If you get rid of the EU, you’re only left with this council – and then you get zero net neutrality but instead TTIP and all the other bullshit.